Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'examination'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Request for Community Support
  • Connect with Community
  • Learn about RTI
  • Website News & Support
  • Read RTI News & Stories
  • RTI Act Critics's RTI Act Critics Topics
  • Fans of RTI India's Fans of RTI India Topics
  • Insurance Consumer's Insurance Consumer Topics
  • Activists of Transparency and Accountability's Activists of Transparency and Accountability Topics
  • Issues with BWSSB's Issues with BWSSB Topics
  • Law+Order-Bangalore-32's Law+Order-Bangalore-32 Topics
  • Issues With Electricity Board's Issues With Electricity Board Topics
  • RTI Activists's RTI Activists Topics
  • YOGA's YOGA Topics
  • help each other's help each other Topics
  • forest and wild life's forest and wild life Topics
  • Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C.'s Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C. Topics
  • RTI Activist+Politics's RTI Activist+Politics Topics
  • hostels and lodging places's hostels and lodging places Topics
  • RTI Activists in Rajasthan.'s RTI Activists in Rajasthan. Topics
  • RTI info warriors in Haryana's RTI info warriors in Haryana Topics
  • DisABILITY Rights and RTI's DisABILITY Rights and RTI Topics
  • Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI.'s Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI. Topics
  • Eco club's Eco club Topics
  • Self Employment in Sport's Self Employment in Sport Topics
  • RTI related to land issue's RTI related to land issue Topics
  • Open SourceTechnology support to RTI's Open SourceTechnology support to RTI Topics
  • TRAP group's TRAP group Topics
  • Odisha RTI Activists's Odisha RTI Activists Topics
  • right to information activists's right to information activists Topics
  • Mumbai's Mumbai Topics
  • Chartered Accountants's Chartered Accountants Topics
  • ngosamachar's ngosamachar Topics
  • Growing INDIA's Growing INDIA Topics
  • we are all friends.'s we are all friends. Topics
  • RTI for Government employees's RTI for Government employees Topics
  • Dhanus - Pending Salaries's Dhanus - Pending Salaries Topics
  • Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors's Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors Topics
  • Mahamumbai's Mahamumbai Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • anti corrupt police's anti corrupt police Topics
  • Save Girl in Punjab's Save Girl in Punjab Topics
  • Rent Apartment in US's Rent Apartment in US Topics
  • RTI Kerala's RTI Kerala Topics
  • maharashtra's maharashtra Topics
  • Right Way Of India(RTI)'s Right Way Of India(RTI) Topics
  • Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India's Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India Topics
  • Navi Mumbai's Navi Mumbai Topics
  • electricity curruption in up's electricity curruption in up Topics
  • SHARE n STOCKS trading's SHARE n STOCKS trading Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • ex-serviceman activities's ex-serviceman activities Topics
  • SSCC's SSCC Topics
  • Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates's Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates Topics
  • jharkhand RTI activist group's jharkhand RTI activist group Topics
  • Suhail's Suhail Topics
  • govt.servant's govt.servant Topics
  • RTI Uttar pradesh's RTI Uttar pradesh Topics
  • anti-corruption team's anti-corruption team Topics
  • Manaism's Manaism Topics
  • Insurance's Insurance Topics
  • sonitpur datri sewa samity's sonitpur datri sewa samity Topics
  • indian youth manch's indian youth manch Topics
  • HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies's HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies Topics
  • youth's youth Topics
  • aastha's aastha Topics
  • RTI for Citizens's RTI for Citizens Topics
  • learn always's learn always Topics
  • R.T.I.'s R.T.I. Topics
  • Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana's Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana Topics
  • Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna's Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna Topics
  • MBA, business and new entrepreneur.....'s MBA, business and new entrepreneur..... Topics
  • students seeking help's students seeking help Topics
  • RTI Corporate's RTI Corporate Topics
  • Electrical group's Electrical group Topics
  • V4LRights's V4LRights Topics
  • Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool's Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool Topics
  • Gaming's Gaming Topics
  • WE Born to help's WE Born to help Topics
  • help the elderly citizen's help the elderly citizen Topics
  • Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association's Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association Topics
  • Corruption free Country's Corruption free Country Topics
  • surajyam's surajyam Topics
  • kanpurvictims's kanpurvictims Topics
  • Railway Group A Services's Railway Group A Services Topics
  • Encroachment of public property by private giants's Encroachment of public property by private giants Topics
  • Case Status - Anti Corruption's Case Status - Anti Corruption Topics
  • Aam Aadmi (The Common Man)'s Aam Aadmi (The Common Man) Topics
  • Court Marriage in Punjab's Court Marriage in Punjab Topics
  • ALL's ALL Topics
  • Youth India Social Group (YISG)'s Youth India Social Group (YISG) Topics
  • ye kya fandda h's ye kya fandda h Topics
  • mindset's mindset Topics
  • anti corruption's anti corruption Topics
  • activism's activism Topics
  • common's common Topics
  • state group's state group Topics
  • social help group's social help group Topics
  • landlords of uttar pradesh's landlords of uttar pradesh Topics
  • Concern Citizens Forum for India's Concern Citizens Forum for India Topics
  • edusystem's edusystem Topics
  • Ratna Jyoti's Ratna Jyoti Topics
  • development in indian village's development in indian village Topics
  • technovision's technovision Topics
  • Mighty India's Mighty India Topics
  • Against Corporate Fraud's Against Corporate Fraud Topics
  • Stop crime's Stop crime Topics
  • NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti's NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Topics
  • Authenticated Public Plateform's Authenticated Public Plateform Topics
  • shalin's shalin Topics
  • terminater's terminater Topics
  • RTI Wind Energy's RTI Wind Energy Topics
  • Go..................?'s Go..................? Topics
  • Co-Op Housing Society's Co-Op Housing Society Topics
  • we are equal's we are equal Topics
  • Phoenix Deals's Phoenix Deals Topics
  • Theft Cases in chandigarh's Theft Cases in chandigarh Topics
  • Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits's Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits Topics
  • Solar Systems's Solar Systems Topics
  • Get aware about ur Education and related rights's Get aware about ur Education and related rights Topics
  • Save Mumbai's Save Mumbai Topics
  • Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board's Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board Topics
  • ashayen's ashayen Topics
  • unemployment's unemployment Topics
  • Employee Solution's Employee Solution Topics
  • is kanpur university against sc/st's is kanpur university against sc/st Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics


  • Uncategorized
  • Section 18 (1)
  • Section 11
  • For Common Man
  • Section 16
  • Section 2(h)
  • Section 8 (1)(j)
  • Simplified RTI
  • Government Employee and RTI
  • RTI Act 2005
  • Success Stories
  • Exempt Organisation
  • DG IT
  • Section 8 (1) (e)
  • Section 2 (h) (d) (i)
  • Supreme Court Decisions
  • Section 2 (j) (i)
  • Section 2
  • Section 8
  • Section 20
  • Section 19
  • SIC Punjab
  • High Court Decisions
  • Section 9
  • Section 24
  • DoPT
  • RTI Awareness
  • Section 6 (3)
  • Section 6
  • Section 2 (f)
  • Opinion
  • Department of Posts
  • Ministry of Railways
  • Departments
  • Ministry of Home Affairs
  • Ministry of Corporate Affairs
  • Ministry of Law & Justice
  • Government of NCT of Delhi
  • Delhi Police
  • Ministry of Human Resource Development
  • Staff Selection Commission
  • Court Decisions
  • CIC Decisions
  • Activism
  • Section 25
  • University
  • Section 7
  • Ministry of Agriculture
  • Section 3
  • RTI Discussions
  • Section 19 (8) (b)
  • Section (1) (d)
  • Section 8 (1) (d)
  • DIrectorate of Education
  • Govt of NCT of Delhi
  • Cooperative Housing Society
  • RTI for School
  • Member RTI
  • Municipal Corporation
  • Ministry of Defence


  • RTI Directory
  • Important RTI Decisions
  • Other Important Court Decisions
  • Sample RTI
  • Acts & Circulars


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...

Found 20 results

  1. Information sought with regard to marks in Civil Services Exam cannot be directed to be furnished mechanically. Furnishing raw marks will cause problems as pleaded by the UPSC which will not be in public interest. The Supreme Court has held that raw and scaled marks awarded to candidates in Civil Services (Prelims) examination cannot be revealed under the Right to Information Act and set aside the Delhi high court order asking UPSC to disclose the marks. The Commission contended that the corrections made in the answer book would likely arouse doubt and perhaps even suspicion in the candidate’s mind and this would not only breed grievances, but would likely lead to litigation.
  2. Shrawan

    Examination Marks RTI

    Version 1.0.0


    RTI Application for Competitive Examination Marks ( Check Application Format and mode of payment of RTI Application Fee from RTI Rules applicable to the public authority ) For guidance in writing and submitting RTI Applications, please refer to: How to Fill RTI Application Form
  3. The CPIO stretched High Court Stay and Supreme Court judgement to justify denial of answer sheet. There is considerable difference in the context in the case of denial of Examination Copies and that of the stay order (supra) of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court . The stay was granted on the primary objection of the petitioner (Union of India) that the answer scripts ordered to be disclosed had been already weeded out as per relevant policy. The commission recorded that "In the circumstances, Commission fails to appreciate the contention of the CPIO, as to how the said stay order is being stretched to justify denial of answer sheet in the present case." Similarly, the claim that Aditya Bandhopadhyay case applies for answer scripts of qualifying exams was unsubstantiated by the commission. The said precedent does not anywhere differentiate between a qualifying exam and a promotion exam. The basic rationale of the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said case is reproduced as under “...Resultantly, unless the examining bodies are able to demonstrate that the evaluated answer-books fall under any of the categories of exempted ‘information’ enumerated in clauses (a) to (j) of sub-section (1) section 8, they will be bound to provide access to the information and any applicant can either inspect the document/record, take notes, extracts or obtain certified copies thereof...” Examination Copies The Appellant had stated that he is aggrieved with the reply of the CPIO and in general his failure in Promotion Exam despite having an exemplary ACR to his credit and having spent financially and mentally on the preparation of this exam. Read similar story here: Railways Recruitment Board advised not to destroy examination copy Here are discussions on Examination and RTI on our forum. Join us! Download the decision from here: Ranjit_H_S_171046 The commission recorded that: "the exemption of Section 8(1)(a) brought out at the hearing stage of the Appeal can only be considered for denial of information. However, the arguments of the Respondents for invoking Section 8(1)(a) is also untenable and rather it appears laboured."
  4. In a Central Information Commission hearing it was advised to Railways Recruitment Board advised not to destroy examination copy during the pendency of a RTI appeal. It was advised by CIC to Change their record retention policy so that a marksheet which is under consideration in an appeal under RTI Act is not destroyed. It was also advised to put on Railway website basic details about every examination after the results are declared e.g. copy of question paper, key answersheet, cut off marks etc. The RTI Applicant has south information on the total marks obtained, copies of question paper and key answersheet, copy of OMR answer sheet and cutoff marks merit of General, OBC & SC/ST categories in the above examination. Railways Recruitment Board advised not to destroy examination copy It was stated by the Railways that a policy decision have taken in the Ministry of Railway that the records pertaining to any examination should be destroyed after one year. Accordingly, in this case, the records have been destroyed and the information in the instant RTI application cannot be provided to the appellant now. CIC came heavily on CPIO and stated that The first appellate authority did not perform his duties as prescribed in the RTI Act. It was noted that CPIO has not furnished all the required information and by now the records have been destroyed. The decision can be read from here!
  5. Piyushsingh2

    NOC for applying for examination

    My organisation only provide 4 NOCs per year for applying for post in other organisation. Is it legal?
  6. Hello, I m a student of M.Sc Final Year Examination , Generally the exam was held in the month of " June " every year , but the results are published around " March or April " Of Next Year. And this excessive delay of " 7 to 8 "months for publishing results is very harmful for student. Because they Neither able to join in any higher course on the same consecutive year , nor able to apply for a job of post graduate level . So in broad way, we can say , there is complete waste of one year , due to the delay of publishing result. So therefore , what may be key points to discuss & write in RTI application ?
  7. I had appered the M.Sc zoology examination as per the predefined four theory papers of syllabus.but after publication of result , i surprise to know that , i got following marks ( Total Marks = 75 ) Paper - I = 0 Paper - II = 61 Paper - III = 55 Paper - IV = 65 It is quite strange & unbelievable to get zero mark in paper - I. So what should be points to ask in RTI application form in wisely manner. What are the points to write in body part ?
  8. I had appered the M.Sc zoology examination as per the predefined four theory papers of syllabus.but after publication of result , i surprise to know that , i got following marks ( Total Marks = 75 ) Paper - I = 0 Paper - II = 61 Paper - III = 55 Paper - IV = 65 It is quite strange & unbelievable to get zero mark in paper - I. So what should be key points to ask in RTI application form in wisely manner. What are the points to write in body part ?
  9. I want to know can i take copy of answer sheet of someone examination through rti.
  10. New Delhi, Mar 23: The Central Information Commission has directed the Bar Council of India to proactively post on its website the question papers and keys of the All India CIC Bar Examination for the benefit of young lawyers. Read more at: Post Bar examination question papers, keys on website: CIC - Oneindia
  11. My relative brother appeared for written examination held by HRD Department for the post of Laboratory Attendant on July 2011 and result declared on 02.02.2013 final result for viva voice is also announced after few days. His name was not there in the list of qualified candidates and he filed a RTI appeal asking for his answer script and question paper along the answer script of other (viva voice)qualified candidates. The department provided only his answer script and question paper and when he inquired about the other candidates answer script they said that its against the RTI act to disclose somebody answer script to other individual person. When we read his answer script we found out that : Total marks was 80 , contains 27 questions (short answer type +fill in the blanks+essay) 1) Out of 25 question (short answer + fill in the blanks carrying 2marks each) he got 6 answer wrong . We did web research and found out that his five answer was correct and one answer had spelling mistake (out of six answer marked wrong by examiner). 2) Last part of question was to write any two essay out of three topics (300 words carrying 15 marks each) He wrote well but they gave him 6 marks and 7 marks each for essay writing. Total he scored 49 out of 80 marks(according to examiner) Now my question is how do we know whether they did a fair judgement or not? How do we draw a conclusion without comparision with other candidates answer script?and also they did not mention marginal marks for qualification? He is suppose to score 54 0ut of 80 More or less I think they didn’t want him to score more than 49 and maybe scoring 50 marks was marginal. If HRD Department does not agree and accept that it was unfair judgment by concerned examiner , Please suggest how do we proceed with further appeal? Can he appeal in court for cancellation or cross-examination with other answer script? And which authority looks in this type of matter? With Regards. Sikkimkochora.
  12. Info panel asks GU to furnish answer sheets to BA student As reported by indianexpress.com on Nov 08, 2012 Info panel asks GU to furnish answer sheets to BA student - Indian Express Observing that evaluated answer sheets fall under the “records” category in the definition of “information” under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Gujarat Information Commission (GIC) has ordered the Gujarat University (GU) to furnish answer sheets to a BA student who had sought these but was denied in September. Mihir Acharya, a final-year student of English Literature at the university, said he had appeared in a “Literary Criticism” in April, but was marked below his expectations. He applied for a re-assessment, but again got less than he expected. “I applied for a second re-assessment, but that too did not give me the marks I thought I deserved,” Acharya said. That was when he heard about the Supreme Court's judgement of August 9, which allowed students to examine their corrected answer sheets. Three days later, he filed an RTI application with the university asking for “certified copies of evaluated answer sheets of Third-Year Bachelor of Arts Paper-9 - Literary Criticism, conducted by Gujarat University in April 2012”, the GIC order said. However, GU's Public Information officer (PIO) replied saying “the aforesaid matter is under the consideration of Gujarat University Executive Council. After the decision of the Executive Council, copy of evaluated answer sheet will be furnished”. Subsequently, Acharya appealed to the GIC, which observed that request for information made under RTI must either be provided or rejected “as expeditiously as possible and in any case within 30 days from the receipt of the request”. “The Commission is also of the view that evaluated answer sheets in the examination conducted by the GU would fall under the definition of 'information' given in section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. Such answer sheets would be 'records' within the meaning of information,” the GIC order, signed by its chief D Rajagopalan, said. The order also referred to the SC judgement, and has asked GU to furnish the answer sheets to Acharya within 15 days.
  13. Dear members, My first post here, I will do the introductions later I need some assistance in filing an appeal to an RTI appellate authority. Some context: I am not satisfied with my scored achieved in the common admission test in November 2011, for which the results were published in Jan 2012. The purpose of filing this RTI is two-fold - Firstly, to determine exactly how well or badly I have done in the examination, and secondly, for some transparency in the entire process. Some background information: The Common Admission Test (CAT) is a prerequisite for entry to the Indian Institutes of Management and many other business schools in India. Since 2009, this examination has been computer based (though not computer adaptive). Many aspects of the examination (Including actual conduct of the examination) has been outsourced to Prometric, a multinational specializing in such tasks. There has been a total lack of transparency in the entire evaluation process. Firstly, the examination is held over several days. The examiners have refused to confirm that questions may repeat across multiple sessions/days. They have only imposed a non disclosure agreement on the candidates. However, you yourself may judge the effectiveness of this when there are in excess of 200,000 test takers. Secondly, the scoring. In the good old days of pencil and paper tests, a candidate recieved a certain number of marks (say 3) for correct answers, and some marks (say 1) were deducted for incorrect answers. In due course, the IIMs would release an answer key. The candidate could, thus, tally his answers with the key and check if the score is roughly equal to what it should be. If it isn't, the candidate can choose what to do about it. Nowadays, only section-wise scaled scores and the total score is provided. The exam conductors, Prometric, have repeatedly stated that , But they refuse to tell us what equivalence (formula) was used, and how they arrived at it. More importantly, a candidate has absolutely no idea of how many questions he got right and wrong. Steps taken: First, I e-mailed a candidate helpline address asking for information. I have attached it, with the reply I received. The reply which refused to answer the questions, but told me to contact catcentre@iimcal.ac.in. I contacted the aforesaid e-mail address, asking them how to file the RTI. There was no response. Thus, I decided to file an RTI application. Since IIM Calcutta was responsible for conducting the CAT this year, that is the place I chose to begin filing the application. A google search revealed this page. The proforma is given here. Even though they accept online applications, I sent it by courier. (Perhaps it should have been sent by speed post/registered post, but that is not the point of contention.) I have attached the RTI query as an attachment. Now some points: 1. The courier was accepted by IIM Calcutta on Feb 16. When no information was forthcoming, on March 30, I sent an e-mail reminder to the PIO. He replied that the query had been forwarded to the concerned department, and told me that a reminder would be sent to them. The mail containing refusal to supply the information came only on April 10. My first question: Can any action be taken against the people concerned for the delay in replying to the RTI? 2. The reply that came on April 10 by e-mail was as follows: Some points come to my mind: a) Is it possible that I mentioned the incorrect department in my RTI application? As an outsider, I do not have detailed information on the internal workings of the institute. Is it mandatory for the applicant to know the right department? Or is the PIO responsible for forwarding it to the right department? b) More likely, in this case, the issue is that Prometric, and the IIMs are playing pass the parcel. The IIMs may say, if probed, that the information is not with them, and is with Prometric. Prometric, not being a government entity, is not covered under the RTI act. This is conjencture on my part, but is a plausible conclusion. I have decided to file an appeal to the appellate authority(as I have nothing to lose), and would like the help of the community members in drafting it. They don't seem to have any specific format for this. I know that other people have filed similar RTIs, but am unable to get their names/contacts for obvious reasons. I would now like to share some online references regarding this matter. * In 2009, when the exam was first conducted online, the then convenor of the CAT Committee had advised the candidates to file an RTI application - Want your CAT score re-evaluated? File RTI - Times Of India * This mentions some general advice, which I've roughly followed : Not Satisfied With CAT Scores - What To Do After CAT? * A directive from the Central Information Commission stating that 'Answer keys must be shared under RTI': Answer keys must be shared under RTI - Times Of India * A news report saying that it is unlikely that the IIMs would reveal information, but also Prometric's willingness to share information in response to RTIs : CAT aspirants' RTI efforts may go waste - Economic Times. * An article mentioning some RTIs filed: 4 RTI appeals filed over CAT scoring - Times Of India * A thread on this forum on a related matter - The awarding of the tender to Prometric : http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/32954-iim-holds-back-information-rti-applicant.html Also, the first appeal can be filed online. Is there any point in mentioning any of the above references, particularly quoting the director of the CAT committee, and the CIC directive? Should I mention the conversation with the Prometric folks? RTI_doc_copy.docx prometric_conv.txt
  14. hello friends , i applied at my university for my evaluated answer sheet they denied to provide me with that , but i have been rejected , i took this matter and attested the meeting of fist applet office (vc) he to denied my appeal stating that rti do not allow you to get certified copy of the answer sheet , at most you can view your answer sheet , and told me that i would be notified regarding this matter in future , within a week . now it has been 4 weeks since then but no communication is made by university . now i wish to take this matter further to state information commission , so i wish how to approach this matter , i hope that i am not late for second appeal
  15. jagrati

    Examination Pattern in India

    New Examination Pattern in India (Revised): General Students: Answer All qustns OBC: Write Any 1qstn SC: Only read qustns
  16. good evening all, I am new to this forum as well as new to this act and in the persuance of my legal studies of LLB I got to know about this act. I want to know how i can get my answer sheets as i suspect there is something wrong in checking my answer sheets of family law and economics. i secured only 49 aad 48 marks in both the subjects resp. but i was expecting around 65 so that was a big hurt to me . Plz provide information how to tackle the situation . And university says that they ll re-evaluate the answersheets themselves and are asking for a fees of 1700 each so what shall do .Moreover if i got the answersheets with the limitation period of RTI Act by whom i can get my answersheets checked and if thers an increase in marks how will the university increase it. plz help me to get awarded by correct marks IF anyone knows the correct approach kindly help , or give me acal or msz on my cell phone i:e XXXXXXXXXXXX - Deleted mobile number - posting against forum rules, will cal u bck
  17. bahl_ajay

    CA examinees can see answersheet

    As reported by Viju B of TNN in the Times of India, New Delhi on 18 Jul 2009 CIC TO RESCUE ‘CA examinees can see answersheet’ Mumbai: This news is bound to cheer all the chartered accountancy students who have been wanting to get a copy of their answersheets after they appeared for the exams. The Central Information Commission, (CIC), in a landmark order, has directed The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to provide a copy of the evaluated answersheet to Vikita V Soni, a candidate who had appeared for the final CA examination. In its order, the commission said that an examinee had the right to access the evaluated answersheets for “self-assessing her performance’’. The case came up for hearing before the commission after Soni, a Khetwadi resident, filed an RTI query in March seeking a copy of her evaluated answersheet. Soni said she was expecting her name in the toppers’ list, she was shocked to know that she had failed. Soni then approached Tarun Mitral Mandal, an NGO, to assist her in filing an RTI query. “She approached us and we helped her in filing the query,’’ said NGO convener Rajen Dharod. Though the query was filed in January, the public information officer of ICAI rejected the query stating, “According to institute rules, this query doesn’t come under RTI ambit.” Welcome - Times Of India ePaper
  18. Exam secretary asks DEO to take action as reported by Bharat Yagnik, 1 Oct 2008, TNN AHMEDABAD: Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board (GSHSEB) examination secretary, Dinesh Patel, has asked DEO, Ahmedabad city, PB Gadhvi, to lodge a complaint in the dummy writer scam. Gadhvi has been asked to lodge complaint against the parents of two students - Harsh Kotak and Komal Patel, who were caught faking injuries and using dummy writers in the class XII science board exams - the doctors who gave them the false certificates and the unidentified people who entered the exam centre posing as members of the invigilation squad. This was in response to an RTI application. The administration was going slow in the case and except for barring the accused students from taking the class XII exam till 2011, no other legal action was initiated against the others as advised by the examination committee. "This communication was sent to Gadhvi by the end of August, to which he had replied that the proceedings of the executive committee be sent to him since it is a legal process. This was also sent 15 days ago," said a senior GSHSEB official. When Gadhvi was asked about the development, he said, "I never received any letter asking to take steps against the parents of the accused students, impostor invigilators and doctors. I would have definitely followed the orders if I had received something." Exam secretary asks DEO to take action -Ahmedabad-Cities-The Times of India
  19. RTI exposes gaffe in recruitments as reported by Rakesh Lohumi, Tribune News Service Shimla, December 14 Is it possible to select a candidate for any post without preparing a merit list of candidates? The answer is “yes”, if one goes by the information supplied by the Himachal Pradesh High Court under the Right to Information Act regarding direct recruitment of additional district and sessions judges in 2007. An application was filed in this regard by RTI activist Dev Ashish Battacharya in which he had sought details of the marks obtained by the selected candidates and also the names and marks obtained by the first five candidates in the merit list in the preliminary, main and viva voce examinations. As per information provided by the state public information officer of the high court, only one candidate was finally selected to the cadre of the district and additional district judge. The candidate was from the general category. However, regarding the names and marks obtained by the first five candidates, he states that the organisation and administration branch of the high court has reported that “no such detail of first five candidates has been prepared”. The selected candidate had obtained 163 marks out of 300 marks in the preliminary examination and his score in the paper of criminal laws was only 21 out of 100 marks. The detail regarding marks obtained in viva voce reads: “average marks out of aggregate of 300 marks X 9 = 207.22 or 207 marks”. The high court had advertised two vacancies, one for ST candidates and the other for general category candidates. In all, 171 candidates, including nine ST candidates, appeared in the preliminary examination. The selected candidate was placed at the 47th place in the list of candidates declared successful in the preliminary examination. The rules lay down that a maximum of 35 candidates can be called for the main examination against a post. It is not clear what criterion was followed for calling candidates for the main examination and the interview. A candidate, Pramod Goyal, who was not called for the interview, had moved the high court for the re-evaluation of his paper of constitutional law. The expert who re-evaluated the paper said in his report that the examiner had been stringent in marking his paper and that he had done as good as the candidates who had been selected for the interview. He should be awarded 100 marks instead of 94 like other selected candidates. While Goyal was called for the interview after re-evaluation, others whose papers were also subjected to such “stringent marking” got no such relief. Bhattacharya points out that the case of Goyal makes it clear that the criteria for calling candidates for the main examination and for the interview were different. A candidate securing 21 marks out of 100 in a paper in the preliminary examination was called for the main examination (and he eventually got selected), but Goyal, who obtained 94 marks out of 200 in a paper in the main examination in the first evaluation, was not called for the interview. The best course, Bhattacharya says, to avoid such controversies is that institutions like the high court and the Vidhan Sabha, which have to oversee the functioning of the entire administrative system, should not get involved in the business of recruitments and, like other departments, leave it to the state public service commission and the subordinate services board. The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News
  20. As reported by Mathang Seshagiri of ENS in expressbuzz.com on 25 September 2008: Express Buzz - Karnataka bar doors open for women employees Probe into RGUHS marks scandal: Arora panel BANGALORE: Controversies and scams refuse to die down at the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS). A two-member committee, headed by retired additional chief secretary J K Arora, which probed the internal assessment (IA) marks scandal at RGUHS, has found that the university itself is guilty of tampering and alterations of internal assessment marks of 14 students of six medical colleges in September 2004. The committee, in its final report to the government — accessed by Express under the Right to Information Act — has stated that the tampering and alterations took place at the computer operators’ level in the computer section of the university. Since the illegal modification of marks amounts to criminal offence, the committee has recommended a thorough probe by Corps of Detectives (CoD) to take further action. The probe report states that four students belonging to MRMC Medical College, Gulbarga; JN Medical College, Belgaum and KIMS, Bangalore were issued admission tickets though they had secured less than 35 per cent marks in IA exams. “The university is responsible for not sending the list of ineligible students well in time. The university has also not taken any steps to ensure its instructions regarding issue of hall tickets are being followed strictly,” states the report. The committee has asked RGUHS to take action against the colleges and also write to the management of these colleges to take appropriate action against the staff involved. In all, the committee has traced 16 cases of alterations, 13 in internal assessment and three in university practical exams in different subjects. These students were issued hall tickets though they hadn’t secured the minimum prescribed marks in the IA exams in contravention of the Medical Council of India regulations. However, no irregularities were observed in the university theory exams. Following widespread allegations over tampering of internal assessment marks in the September 2004 exams, the then Chancellor T N Chaturvedi directed the Government to order an independent inquiry by experts under section 8 of the RGUHS Act 1994. Consequently a two-member committee comprising J K Arora and former RGUHS vice-chancellor S Chandrashekar Shetty was constituted, which submitted its findings and recommendations in two parts — one in December 2005 and the other in June 2006.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy